MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990340673

Os desafios do trabalho pedagógico na construção da escrita

2019· article· pt· W2990340673 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Denise Puglia Eraclide

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Pedagogy and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociologyPedagogy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A presente pesquisa e intitulada “Os desafios do trabalho pedagogico na construcao da escrita pois a escola e uma instituicao educacional que objetiva a formacao integral do educando. Para tanto, ela necessita garantir o desenvolvimento de praticas pedagogicas que possibilitem o aprendizado, uma vez que o processo de ensino-aprendizagem esta ligado, entre outros fatores, a metodologia adotada pelo professor e ao empenho do aluno. Nota-se, porem, que o professor tem encontrado dificuldades em diagnosticar e interferir para que o aprendizado dos alunos em processo de alfabetizacao seja significativo e o avanco dos mesmos se efetive. Portanto, pretendeu-se analisar, refletir e compreender o processo de construcao da escrita, atraves do estudo da psicogenese, verificando quais as concepcoes sobre alfabetizacao que marcaram os metodos de ensino ao longo da historia no Brasil, observando o panorama atual da escola publica, abordando sobre os grandes desafios que ela enfrenta, para assim, podermos elencar os desafios encontrados com maior frequencia no decorrer do processo ensino-aprendizagem. Este estudo foi conduzido atraves de pesquisa qualitativa, pois e um campo que envolve as ciencias humanas-sociais e diversos metodos de investigacao para o estudo de um fenomeno situado no local em que ocorre, procurando tanto encontrar o sentido desse fenomeno quanto interpretar os significados que as pessoas dao a eles. Deferimos que a alfabetizacao deve acontecer em um espaco dinâmico, enfatizados na interacao aluno-aluno, aluno-professor e aluno-ambiente, favorecendo a aprendizagem, considerando-se o contexto social onde esta aquisicao ocorre e a necessidade do letramento, ou seja, da “leitura de mundo”.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.195
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFOR Information Systems and Operational ResearchSame topicEducation Pedagogy and PracticesFrench-language works237,207